2014 Specialized S-Works Enduro 29 SE - First Look and First Ride

Specialized unveiled a breakthrough 29er in Finale Ligure, Italy, that handily solves some of the major issues that have, up until now, restricted the rear wheel travel of most big-wheel bikes to around 120-millimeters and tire widths at or below 2.3 inches. The Enduro 29 SE is aimed directly at international enduro competition, with 155-millimeters of wheel travel, make-it-happen geometry and frame clearance for full size tires up to 2.5 inches wide. Right about now, naysayers are probably quoting a handful of pre-existing 29ers with similar travel, but such numbers, especially in the arena of big-wheel bike design, are misleading. Enduro 29 SE frames sport a 430-millimeter (16.9 inch) chainstay length. That's only eleven millimeters longer than the already compact stays of the 26-inch Specialized Enduro. Comparatively, that is over 25-millimeters shorter than the best 29ers in the 120 to 130-millimeter range. You'd need a yardstick to measure the chainstay lengths of most 29ers with rear-wheel travel longer than that. Starting with a rear end that compares to a 26-inch all-mountain design ensures that the Enduro 29 will turn, climb and maneuver with similar nimbleness - attributes that have eluded all but the most elite 29ers to date. Up front, the Enduro 29 backs up its promise of on-trail performance with a 67.5-degree head angle and a 150mm Fox 34 Float CTD fork. Between the wheels is a cleverly designed frame with an x-braced carbon fiber front section, suspended by a welded aluminum FSR rear end.

A look at the frame reveals a compact carbon front section - squeezed by the fact that the seat tube was moved well forward to provide tire clearance for the additional rear-suspension travel. The Enduro 29 SE's actual seat tube angle is 69 degrees, but an imaginary line from the crank axle through the seatpost head, measured at an average ride-height, works out to an effective angle of approximately 75 degrees.

Specialized also went all out in the component department. The top-range S-Works Enduro 29 SE is built around SRAM's XXI wide-range one-by-eleven transmission and four-piston X.0 brakes.The S-Works 29er rolls on Specialized's recently released Roval Traverse SL tubeless carbon fiber wheelset, and up top it gets the new internal-cable Command Post IR dropper and a host of Specialized cockpit items, mostly crafted from carbon fiber. At the heart of the S-Works Enduro is a Cane Creek Double Barrel Air shock, which has been factory tuned for the bike. For those interested, the Enduro 29 SE will be available in three models, with the S-Works (tested) starting at $9,000 USD, followed by the more-affordable Expert Carbon and Comp. Sizes are medium, large and x-large (Specialized's magic, unfortunately could not shrink the height of a 29er) and the stated weight for the S-Works Enduro 29 SE is 27.6 pounds (12.55kg).

Construction Details

Presenting the Enduro 29 SE to the assembled journalists, Brandon Sloan, the bike's designer, read out a mind-bending list of numbers and details, like 155 millimeters of rear-wheel travel, 430-millimeter chainstays and a 67.5-degree head-angle. To put those numbers into context, Niner gets 140 millimeters from their WFO and the Santa Cruz Tall Boy LT has 135 millimeters. More than that, the Enduro 29's chainstay length is significantly shorter than many 160 millimeter travel 26-inch bikes. When pressed as to how Specialized achieved those numbers, the answer was not magical. The engineers looked at every aspect of the frame design where they could squeeze out more clearance and also selected components that offered the same advantages. The end result is a long-travel 29er in a compact package - the wheelbase is just 1159 millimeters for the medium sized bike.

The removable 'Taco Blade' front derailleur mount (left) is a space saver and it freed the designers to move the seat tube well forward of the cramped bottom bracket area. Specialized invented the chin-shaped seat stay arch (right) to clear the seat tube at full compression.

The seat tube is moved forward and curved to clear the tire at full compression and the swingarm was ovalized near the bottom bracket to make room for larger tires. The chin-shaped lower brace at the upper end of the seat stay linkage is thinned and profiled to miss the seat tube. Using SRAM's XXI single-chainring crankset bought a lot of tire clearance, and in the case of the Expert Carbon and Comp models, which use a two-by-ten drivetrain, Specialized devised a thin, swingarm-mounted front derailleur bracket called the 'Taco Blade' to squeeze between the rear tire and its SRAM bottom-pull front mech. By affecting a number of small improvements in the critical bottom bracket area of the Enduro 29's rear suspension, Specialized gained an inch of rear-wheel travel and room for full-sized racing tires.

(Left) Specialized calls it an X-Wing frame design. The cross-braced front section has been the trademark feature of its Enduro series. S-Works models get the new Cane Creek DBair shock, which can be tuned externally to suit almost any riding style. (Right) The 142x12-millimeter through-axle is a must for true all-mountain abuse.

. Component Highlights

At the heart of the S-Works bike we were riding was a handmade Fact 11M carbon frame - this is Specialized's highest standard carbon for mountain bikes.The cranks turn on a PF30 press-fit bottom bracket and out back is a 142x12-millimeter rear axle. A Cane Creek Double Barrel Air shock controls the rear wheel and a travel-adjustable Fox TALAS 34 CTD fork sits out front. Impressively (1640-gram/pair) light Roval Traverse SL wheels are shod with Specialized-brand 2.3-inch Butcher and Purgatory Control tires, and the DT-Swiss made rear wheel contains the special freehub to mount the SRAM XX1 cassette.

The S-Works Enduro 29's drivetrain is XX1, paired with SRAM's four-piston XO Trail brakes. It is worth noting that Specialized chose to mount an e*thirteen XCX+ top guide and did not rely solely on SRAM's claim that its XX1 sprocket will keep the chain in order. The test bike had the standard Specialized Command Post Blacklight, but production Enduros will have the 'IR' version with internal cable routing. Up front were a 720mm Specialized-branded bar and 60-millimeter stem, and there was some discussion as to what sizes would see production. For the test, I swapped those out for my benchmark Renthal 760-millimeter handlebar and 50-millimeter stem combination.

Knowing I was going to ride Specialized's Enduro 29 made me nervous. I freely admit that I think its 26 inch-wheeled brother is the best all-round mountain bike out there. It's the one mountain bike I actually own, the one I don't need to worry about explaining in a review or handing back all-too-soon. So to find out they'd butchered big, circus wheels into a new version of it worried me. Driving down to the camp I spent my time trying to figure out how I'd explain to the people who had poured hours of their time into this bike that it was an abomination. How do you tell someone that they've taken a great bike and turned it into something that would make the baby Jesus weep?- Matt Wragg

Suspension setup: I use a decidedly stiff setup for my suspension. Fox's Float CTD forks have a tendency to blow through their travel, so sorting this out was where I started with the new Enduro. For me, having the fork stand up in the travel is always the winner because I push the bike hard, but it comes at the expense of low-speed sensitivity and outright comfort. When the going gets ugly, having the front end dive can either cause the bike to fold under you or send you out the front door. I have the scar tissue to testify to that. To achieve this, I run the air spring very hard and leave the CTD adjuster in the medium, 'Trail' setting as a default to add more compression damping. This makes for a fork that feels unforgiving at low speeds, but as you get faster and hit things harder it comes alive and keeps you out of trouble when you most need it to. Matching the fork meant putting a lot of pressure into the Cane Creek Double Barrel air shock, which was a real shame, because I didn't scratch the surface of the this fully-adjustable shock's amazing potential.

Climbing: We didn't spend much time climbing, so I can't report on how the bike does on longer drags, but as it's light, stiff and comfortable I wouldn't expect it to be anything other than fast. On short, steep climbs, the front end was a touch high and once I even caught myself reaching for the dreaded TALAS switch to lower the fork to get its front end back under control. With more time on the bike, this would be something I would want to play with to figure out whether I would need to adjust my technique, or try and lower the handlebar height.

Descending: The first thing you notice when you start going downhill on this bike, from the very first pedal stroke, is how fast it is. It picks up speed alarmingly. Even rolling into a straight from the trailhead it seems to find speed from nowhere. With the big wheels and relaxed geometry it feels strangely stable as well. You suddenly find yourself coming into corners and technical sections with far more pace than is comfortable. On the first couple of runs, this meant moments of total fear. Judging entry speed was tough and with the big circus wheels under me, there seemed to be no way the bike would be able to stick it. So I just went steaming in and prayed. After a few of those moments, a realization dawned on me. It wasn't blind faith getting me through the corners, but the bike. Once I started to trust it and give it some muscle, I began to understand just how capable this bike was.

Final Thoughts

As part of the launch, we took the bikes down a trail in Finale Ligure called Cacciatori (Hunters). It's one of the older trails in the zone and it has always been steep as hell, but years of neglect have turned it into a rock-strewn nightmare. Huge holes, rainwater channels and awkward rocks have been exposed, so what was once a tough trail is now a near-vertical minefield of baby head rocks. On that kind of terrain, the Enduro 29 was nothing short of impressive. I could nimbly skip between features, hold a line or turn the bike on a dime as the trail twisted back on itself. When I faced the holes, the big wheels made life easier, I felt a lot further from being thrown out the front door than I do on a 26-inch bike. Catching my breath at the bottom, I had to admit I was wrong about this bike. Cacciatori is the kind of trail that I assumed would feel horrible on a 29er, but the Enduro 29 felt in its element there.

To further understand more about the differences between the 26 and 29-inch Enduros, I was lucky enough to take the bike back to one of my home trails. Taking the bike down a trail I knew inch-by-inch was the perfect opportunity to get my head around its finer points. While the handling is fast on the 29, faster than many 26-inch bikes even, I could catch it out. There is one section where you must kink between three rocks, threading a very fine line between them to stay off the brakes. On the 29 it didn't quite make it, there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail that I sometimes ride six times a week; they don't detract from how shockingly capable this bike is.

• SRAM's XX1: Good - XXI provided the crisp gear shifting I was expecting. Bad - on the second run of the first day I managed to snap the chain trying to put power down out of a corner. It's not clear how this happened and it seems to be a fairly unique event. The XO Trail brakes that accompanied it were a disappointment, they never offered quite enough power and the bite point felt vague and inconsistent. When it came to descending bigger mountains, they didn't survive the heat build-up well.

• Command Post Blacklight Dropper: Bad - the Specialized mechanical dropper had slightly too much air pressure in it and nearly took out one of my testicles. Good - after I'd taken some air out of the system, an easy job of popping the post off the bike and opening the valve at the base, it worked as well as I hoped it would.

• Roval Traverse SL wheels: Good - 'impressive' is the only word for the Roval wheelset. Over the short test period, I hit them as hard as I could and did my usual trick of landing everything at a weird angle, and they didn't complain once. The same goes for the hookless-bead tubeless system; the carbon rims held air perfectly and I can't report a single problem.

• Butcher and Purgatory Control Tires: Good - when the bike was upright, the Specialized tires were fast rolling and grippy. Bad - when I got them on their sides, they seemed to be lacking grip and didn't encourage me to push the bike hard. On loose, dusty trails they were not confidence inspiring on the edges and this is a shame because they rolled quite nicely. If Specialized beefed up the side profiles, they would be fantastic.

Pinkbike's take:

I was wrong about this bike. It was nothing like I feared it would be and, no matter how much I look at the numbers, I still don't really understand how Specialized have managed it. This bike, without question, pushes the boundaries of what is possible with a 29-inch wheeled bike. It also throws light back onto the question of whether or not we need 650B bikes when 29ers can handle like this. This bike blew away any preconceptions of what I thought a 29er could or should be, and for that reason alone I love it. Would I trade my 26-inch Enduro for the newer, bigger-wheeled version? Probably not, as personally I still prefer the immediacy of the smaller wheels, but it's a far closer call than I would have ever imagined it could be. -Matt Wragg

And this concerns me "there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail"

The small details and boosting of tiny undulations is what makes riding fun. If I have to trade that in for a bigger set of wheels than no thanks!

I recently test rode the 26 carbon enduro and when I was done I walked into the shop pissed because I clearly couldnt afford this bike and It was by far the best bike I have ever thrown my leg over....we ended up choking about how we would have to sell a kidney to buy this bike....Nedless to say; I have one kidney now...thanks specialized

Do not think for one second they will end the 26" version any soon, since it is ridiculous awesome. Although if the enduro cup riders will switch to 29" maybe they drop the expensive ones in the 26" line.

I measure 1.89m and I ride 26er XC / AM and enduro. The 26er is the wheel size that suits me better.Finally, the wheel size has nothing to do with the size of the people. It is only a matter of feeling!

Sorry but this had to be said, it looks like the retarded brother of the 26" enduro.wheel size is a matter of the hart, 26 is what my hart wants (more like demands).all 29 fanboys will probably flame me (they always say no hating... when they are the ones on the attack!),but i don't care a 29" enduro is an anomaly and has no real use in enduro unless they change the rules and start timing uphills instead downhills.if this 29" thing catches on the enduro circuit then its only a matter of time until enduro becomes a glorified cross country race.

Specialized 29ers have shorter toptubes relatively to the claimed model sizes than other brands. This medium's TT is the same as a Small Salsa Horsethief, and the XL is the same as the large Salsa (Salsa also goes up to an XL), but Salsa does this sort of packaging in a shorter wheelbase.

what's with all the complaining about the smallest one being medium !? there is a physical limit with big wheels and long travel... if you want the bike to perform well. And unless I'm wrong spesh's marketing and engineering has always been careful and on the spot, killing of the 26 inch segments is a hunt for witches, its not going to happen soon. What we are seeing is a trend to explore and try new things, and frankly its needed. We are far from done with new axles, wheel, derailleurs, forks, standards ...etc its making our bikes better every year. way to go Specialized !

I was just thinking that at 5'5" I would look and feel ridiculous on this bike - such a tall front and high riding position. Not for me!Fact of the matter is, the average North American male is 5'9 1/2". This is a documented piece of information that big companies (the military being the biggest) use to design human interactions. Average female is 5'6".

@donch15 hey I'll be thinking of you, next time you get seat 26E on a crowded Southwest Airlines flight.

@deeeight, it is important to note that the seat tube angle is 75degs, where most competitors have 72-73. A steeper st angle will add alot to the reach for the same tt lenght making the bike effectively longer. I always compare the reach instead as it takes into acount the seat angle. Top tupe lenght alone does not reveal the whole story.1 deg difference in st angle will reflect in about 10mm in reach. I manage to fit a medium specialized where i would ride a xl ibis or santacruz to have the same cockpit feel.

Another thing with specialized is that they run setback seat posts which adds close to an inch to the seat-bar distance.

@twozerosix...thanks little guy, but I'll be the guy up in 1st class enjoying my legroom

But that's exactly the point. You're miniscule dimensions would look kind of ridiculous on a 29er...the same way my manly physique has looked kind of silly on XL frames with 26" wheels for the last 15 or so years.

Just like human beings getting taller...it's just evolution my friend.

Frankly, I do not care what Specialized does, as I will never buy anything from them again. I have had 1994 FSR, but that's it. I do not like their business practices, and I do not like too many non-standard bits on their bikes.
I will always be able to order any size I like from Ventana and Nicolai, or whoever comes after them.

Another sick 2014 bike already? This thing is a an extremely light 29er with adjustable lower travel settings for it to rip XC, yet has the geometry, travel, and components for it so rip some DH. Cannot wait to see how pros grasp this bike as the future of the thing in the middle: Enduro.

I hate 29er's as much as anyone else, but this new bike is just amazing. The amount of technology and the numbers they achieved with a 29er are insane, all the advantages of a 26 and the advantages of massive wheels with no downsides? Awesome. A little more muscle will make up for the small loss of playfulness..just do a couple pushups and you'll be fine. Awesome bike Specialized, about time someone did this with a 29er

@Gilo, the effective seat angle is 75 not the actual angle (which is 69). This effective measurement is on good for wherever Specialized decided to measure its typical seat extension to. In the case of this frame you absolutely cannot link the reach measurement to the seat tube angle. Without stack and reach or a test ride there is no way to see if this bike will fit a certain rider properly. And a setback seatpost is not a good solution for a short top tube.

Stack and reach is where it is at but Specializd fail to give us that.

@donch15 dude relax. What benefit do you gain by going in the world hating on people, and thinking yourself more "evolved" than others that are only physically different than you?

If you really want to prove yourself, I'll forward you the Strava account of one of lower ranking women on Canada's national team. She is 5'3". On some of the technical trails here, the fastest guys on 180mm travel mega bikes can't keep up with her when she is on her dainty hardtail. And we are talking about freaking North Shore riders. The biggest gnarl in your neck of the woods is mickey mouse shit in comparison.

@Gilo.. regarding the seattube angles.... the actual angle isn't 75 and that's pointed out in the review. The "effective" angle is based on the position of the clamp head of the post at a typical extension for a certain size of rider, relative to the BB center. But that holds true for any bike when you change the offset of the seatpost clamp by using a different post. Its even worse on bikes like the maverick design which run a very slack seat tube angle. Also you're thinking in reverse... a steep angle results in less of a change in the effective toptube as the saddle goes up and down than does a slacker angle. Rocky Mountain's have been employing steep SA's for a few years now, especially on the Altitude models. They call it Straight-Up geometry. And we're talking ACTUAL physical seattube angles, not effective virtual angles. Last year's Altitude 29er had a 76 degree seat angle, this year's Altitude 650B has a variable 73.6 to 75.3 SA. The Slayer 26er AM bike has a 75 SA, the Instinct 29er has the same variable angle range as the Altitude, and the Element 26er are 73.5 degrees and 29ers are 74 degrees. Even the Flatlines have a steep 74 degree SA.

Also as far as the toptubes being short... you're also forgetting this is a twenty niner... the toptubes HAVE to be longer for a given nominal frame size because the wheel radius has increased. If you didn't increase the top and down tube lengths to stretch out the front of the bike, you'd have the toe of your foot striking the tire when you turned. Also the change in effective toptubes with geometry angle changes isn't the 10mm per degree you think it is. Salsa happens to list different measurements for different fork travels for their Horsethief 29er trail bike. And with a 20mm shorter fork, the angles get 0.9 degrees steeper at the seat and head tubes BOTH, but the effective toptube length only shrinks by 3mm.

Why is everyone making a fuss about the fact that the smallest size is a Medium with a TT of 23.4"? Santa Cruz doesn't make any of their FS 29ers in a size smaller than Medium (23.1") and nobody loses their cool about it.

Long travel bikes with big wheels aren't for small people. Vote with your wallet and buy a 26" Enduro.

Its because specialized seems to be focusing on a specific range of rider sizes with their frame fitting. As I pointed out, the lengths for toptubes of their med, large and XL sizes are the same as Salsa is for small, medium and large. But Salsa goes to an Extra Large also that truly is that... its 1/2" longer in toptube than the Specialized XL. Salsa includes a rider height in their geometry chart, and their large (which matches up to the Specialized XL) is for a rider up to 6'3". Beyond that and a rider should be on their XL model. I myself am 6'6" and prefer the large Salsa and 110mm extension stem (over an XL with a 95mm) and that's fine, but I'm in the exception category to bike fit not the rule.

Sure guys we can sit here all day argueing with numbers and stuff but t you have to admit that with numbers like this the 29" is getting more and more cred but I believe that it will never truly take over. 29" will stay on xc bikes, 26" on DH and in everything in between it should be a personal opinion, personally I'd have to say that with the technology on this bike, I might want to look into more and more 29" bike becoming more prominent

Specialized isn't making a smaller frame because it would screw up the geometry and ride characteristics of the bike. The 29" wheels put a limit on what they can do... besides , anyone under 5' 6" looks silly on a 29er.

@deeeight, the effective st angle is measured 250mm from the seat post clamp(top of st). Because the real seat angle is slacker then the effective, it means that if the seat is lower, it is equivalent to having a much shorter top,tube. If the seat is higher, then it is equivalent to having a much longuer tt.

Perhaps we are really trying to say the same thing here. The point i am trying to make is that top tube lenght alone can be missleading.

To evaluate if your toes will hit the wheels, you want to look at the front center when comparing bikes. The front center is the product of the head angle, seat angle and top tube lenght. Wheelbase minus chainstay lenght is the easiest way to calculate front center.

There are so many variables when looking at geometry that i am at the point where i draw the geometry in cad before i buy a bike. This way i can measure exactly how i would fit on the bike. And that is still no substitute for trying the bike, not always an option unfortunately.

We could throw numbers all day long but the fact of the mather is that the specialized has a longer reach then the salsa horsethief in medium and large, wich seamed to be your concern at first.

Also the front center is 704mm and 724mm on the med and large salsa and specialized is 729 and 753 Respectively.Again less chances of interference with front wheel-feets on the specialized

One word, Lenz. This company has been producing the worlds ONLY production downhiill 29er. Specialized thinks they are so revolutionary and well... special! The fact that Pinkbike didn't even mention them once sucks. Lenz also makes a 6" travel 29er. For Pinkbike to have the audacity to tout how "new" this is sucks as well. "Hi, Lenz? It's Specialized. You win!"

You've posted this same thing on every single article related to the new Enduro 29er on the entirety of the internet. Give it a rest.
Just because someone did something first, doesn't mean they did it the best. Specialized has made several, very obvious, improvements over the Lunchbox.

The market is going that way because of all the benefits that larger wheels bring to the game. For most riders, trails just get funner on a 29 once you get used to it. I was skeptical for years about wheel strength, seeing so many tacos in years past. Last year, when riding stumpjumper 29 on slick rock, I was amazed how stable & trustworthy it felt. I had one of my fastest rides down Burro pass on it with stock wheels! 130 mm feels like 150 mm on the big wheel platform, so it leads me to think the Enduro will be able to shred almost like a DH bike. I wanted this bike, but had to go for the EVO Stumpy, as it feels even more trusty with the 140 mm Fox 34. Just hope we can get one for our rental fleet! Oh yeah, Bring on the 29 x 2.5 tires! That new Butcher 2.4 looks skinny * )

Agree completely! First off NO ONE has better customer service than Ventana. All bikes can be custom ordered-both geometry and paint. What pisses me off about the big companies is the outrageous price charged when they can build at a lower cost per unit.

Why would I but a Santa Cruz, Spesh, or Trek when I can call the owner of Ventana, explain what I want and have it cost under $2500 for a custom frame? Not to mention the buy back policy that knocks 30% off!

Run the suspension on your bandit harder! Because the big wheels smooth the trail out you can get away with it. Less than 15% sag does the trick for mine. I find that 26" bikes are much less popie and playful than a well set up 9er! I sense negative props coming my way for that comment:-)

@Gilo, forget about the labels on the sizing because you can't necessarily compare a medium from one company to a medium from another. I expect the largest size 29er to have at least a 25.5" top tube and Specialized hasn't done this. As it sits the XL is too small for me at 6'5" so I'll be waiting for Santa Cruz's new bike. They have realized that taller riders like 29ers and have sized their frames to suit.

Trying to compensate by raising the seatpost just throws th balance of th bik off when you have these wonky curved seat tubes.

Again, stack and reach are the only measurements that matter on these frames with non-conventional seat tubes.

@bogey, the reach on an xxl tallboy lt is 457mm and the large enduro is 457mm as well. (I am basing the reach off the 26 enduro which has the same st angles and top tube lenght...so consequently the same reach for both 26 and 29er)

I agree that at 6'5" this will be on the tight side but with a 70-80 mm stem you should be all set.

I am 6ft and ride a medium stumpy evo with a 75mm stem and it is just perfect.....right at the limit but it works really well.

No way it will be 480 unless they make a XXL. An XXL TBc is 465mm and a Yeti SB66 is 466mm. The 26" Enduro fits slightly big for its size because they decided not make an XL (I've also ridden the L Enduro and I don't believe their reach number because it doesn't feel anywhere as big as my XXL TBc or my old XL SB66). If you you look at the other 29ers from Spec they are only near 480 in an XXL.

If the XL Enduro 29 truly has a reach of around 460 I'd be pretty happy. Can't afford it though!

As @Bogey correctly pointed out, Stack and Reach is really the best way to compare sizes between bikes. Your saddle position should always be set up as a distance back from your crank spindle, based on leg length. You select your post offset and adjust your saddle rail position based off the BB. Then you select your frame size (or TT length) and stem length based on your desired rider compartment.

ST angle and TT length can be misleading.

We publish Stack and Reach for all our bikes at www.specialized.com and the 29er geos should be up shortly.

And this concerns me "there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail"

The small details and boosting of tiny undulations is what makes riding fun. If I have to trade that in for a bigger set of wheels than no thanks!"

While that is true you have to remember that he hasn't had long on the bike so he won't be completely used to it. I think you would find that he would get used to the bike and how to ride it aggressively.

@captain snappyI had before the stumpjumper 29 carbon, I sold it after two month, it didn't suit my style of riding. I don't have anything against it.Everyone have their own style of riding and style of bike

The 13 Enduro expert Evo is damn hard to find. Way too limited production, IMO. A total of two available in Utah, and we have a big red S warehouse here in SLC! Jason--can't wait! LBS-several-have lots of Stumpy Evos, carbon and alloy.

i understand. i was told that it, the 2013 enduro evo, would be here (in colorado) by the end of this month (which is tomorrow). and now im hearing that they havent even gotten them in Cali yet... is this true?

I must have been pretty lucky, I guess. Walked into Santa Cruz, Ca bike shop and they had both the enduro and enduro evo on hand for sale and test ride. Ordered evo comp from my lbs which is smaller to give them the business and it was ready to ride in 4 days.

I was a big fan of specialized enduro's until I saw this article. please don't let the 26inch enduro line die out. I sincerely hope DH bikes aren't next in the crosshairs at Specialized, although if it is, my demo will be worth a lot in a few years time...

they already did - www.vitalmtb.com/product/compare/11866-11865-11864. look at the advertisement there - it is clear that from $pecialized POV you would be criminal not to ride a 29' bike. just wonder what do would come up next once we would all ride 29' with 0x21 gearing and 15k$ carbon bikes?

The number of people wanting high eng 26" wheel bikes is dropping fast. Once a few 650b's get out there and people start trying them, they will feel first hand the benefit, and the market will switch over in entirety. I suspect this bike is experiencing the same fate as the Lapierre reviewed earlier this week. It was designed at the early end of the new product cycle, and the companies missed the 650b memo. On the other hand, this is the only 29er I would consider buying at this point. My el Guapo is showing its age, and for a heavier hitter, this could be a possibility, but I will likely go with 650b as there will be a lot of development in tire4s/weheels in the next few years.

Many companies, including Specialized, were slow to get on the 29er boat. The rush to 650 is more driven by fear of missing the next boat, rather than the push or demand for a true technology advancement.
650 really doesn't begin to approach the benefits of big wheels that big wheel riders like. 650 will not replace 29, but it might replace 26.

Of course he's speaking at a representative of the company, that was late to 29ers and initially tried to ignore them and now is so heavily invested in the format that he's trying to sell the 29er KoolAid to everyone regardless of their own experience with anything else. Myself I've got five years with 650Bs and had already decided I wasn't going to get another 29er after my Salsa Dos Niner, when my girlfriend went and gave me a Salsa Spearfish frameset for christmas in 2011. Of course I had to build it up then. But that's the last one for me until one of my existing frames breaks, and only then might I consider another since I already have the wheelset/parts for one.

If you don't like it then don't give your money to specialized. I think it's great that specialized refuses to follow all the other bike companies. new boundary pushing bikes like this give the consumer more options. I think they have designed a great long travel 29er and absolutely nailed this new category of bike.

As a taller rider who rides an XL 26" S-Works Enduro I've always found the fit of bigger frames lacking. When I recently rode a Stump Evo 29 the light bulb went on! Finally a bike that fits, now if only they'd make one a bit slacker with a bit more travel... Well let's just say my 26" Enduro is now for sale. If I can get the improved tall-guy fit of a 29er in a compact descent-friendly package with the right geometry then sign me up! Oh wait I already did. I ordered the XL alloy version of the Enduro 29er this morning.

No it's about the wheel size. It's about the BB drop and the stack height. On a 26" bike there is very little BB drop so a tall rider with a high center of gravity ends up super high over the bike. The ongoing trend of short head tubes only makes this whole process worse. 29" wheels allow the rider to sit deeper in the bike. My Enduro is just about one of the biggest AM bikes you can buy and it doesn't fit nearly as well as the Stumpjumper EVO 29er I rode (and they have roughly the same physical dimensions). The fit is directly related to the wheels.

On the flipside, I found the wheels a bit odd to ride. They ride big. I think it's something I could get used to but for now I'm not certain. I'm told they're wicked going downhill, especially steep rock faces with abrupt transitions (which we have a lot of around here). Despite that I have trouble visualizing myself really railing corners the way I do on my 26" bike. I rode a 650b bike and instantly felt no doubt they would be awesome, but then again they're pretty close to a 26" wheel and no one yet makes a 650b bike anywhere close to the size of my XL Enduro.

like axxe said - its about the fit and nothing else - fact is road bikes, moto bikes and until now MTB bikes all have the same outer wheel diameter for the simple reason that most humans (and me and my riding buddies are all more than 6'' tall) find the 26 good enough. The BB drop has nothing to do with it (at least from engineering POV - and I am an engineer). You cannot make a tall rider rider the same as short one just use your height to your advantage - big wheel will only come in your way. "stiff wheels and meaty tires works just splendid for me."I would too will sell my 2011 Enduro but only because I don't want to have anything to do with $pecialized any more after this act of obscenity with the new Enduro here.

Wheel size is about the terrain and corners. You are riding off-road and the wheels have to accommodate for that, on the other hand they also have to allow for proper cornering. A balance has to be struck between cornering and navigating obstacles, and rolling over obstacles and not getting hung up.The fit is about your size compared to the size of bike and wheel. Regardless of terrain, you dont want your mountain bike to ride like a folding bicycle, nor do you want it to ride like a penny-farthing.

So yea, there is a decent amount of preference involved, your type of riding, preferred terrain, riding style, etc. And yea, its possible to sacrifice some on the fit to get the advantages of a certain wheel size, but you have to strike the right balance. I'm 5'7, I'v ridden 29" and felt like an 8y old put on a full sized bike. On the other hand a friend of mine is 6'6 and whenever he sits on a bike I'm thinking why the hell dont they make bigger wheels, bigger cranks, bigger everything, for bigger riders. I think its all about finding the right balance, claiming either size is generally better/faster is absolute utter bollocks. PS. race tracks are designed with certain bikes in mind, so that's chicken or the egg.

i have a question. Where is this internal routed post?? As i can see nasty flappy cable hangging from the seat. Are they not doing a 'stealth' version or is it just internally routed at the front of the frame like they are allready??

The level of butthurt in this comment section is astounding. If you dont like the big wheels, dont buy it!

Let me repeat myself....DONT BUY IT!!!

No one is shoving wheelsizes down your throats ladies and gentlemen. You only ride what you buy and and what you like.

If people want to get down on big wheels let them. Mountain biking has always been about having bikes the fit a wide range of riding disciplines and a wide range of rider personalities. This version of the enduro is just another step down a familiar path of finding a bike that will suit another riders needs, just maybe not your own.

I have tried to be open-minded about the whole 29er thing and while I do agree there are many benefits I cannot seem to bring myself to like the look of any of them, regardless of the brand. They are so ugly and awkward looking because of the big wheels. PLEASE keep making 26ers for some of us who prefer them.

It's funny that most people who adamantly diss 29ers have never actually ridden one. Don't knock it till you try it. For bigger riders on certain terrain, the 29er is superior to a 26" for a lot of reasons.

Why do you guys freak out and think that they're going to get rid of 26" bikes? Seriously? Like.... where does this idea even come from???

Every article that features a 29 inch bike, it's almost nothing but comments throwing fits about them. Oh god, what really is good for a laugh is how many people here think that the entire industry is in cahoots to ONLY screw you out of money and that they clearly don't care about the riders. The mind reels...

Also, you are flat out stating that it's the LOOK of the bike that makes you not want it. Not how it rides, now what situations it's better in or worse in, now how it performs, nothing that actually matters. JUST THE LOOK? Really? Is this what our sport is devolving into?

Cyrix, we freak out about them replacing 26ers because at very least in Australian and NZ markets Giant and Spec only bring in 29ers, with the exception of the stumpy evo comp, Enduro and Reign (and their DH bikes too). I know all the options are still available in the USA but not so to other parts of the world, and you can't buy these brands online.

Couldn't agree more shardman, you're choices of bikes in Australia is restricted by two of the major players to mainly 29er.
I'm not anti 29er but we are being forced that way especially if your new to mountain biking.
I know of two people who are new to the sport and bought 29er, I then had to explain the pros and cons to them.
I'm not saying they chose badly, just that they weren't given an option.

I hear you shardman, as of december last year there were no stumpys or enduros coming to Adelaide until April (at the earliest), plus I had to whinge to Giant on facebook to get a reign 1 shipped, and you can't get a reign x at all. Don't take this the wrong way, even though my reign 1 is currently in the shop with both the fox fork (CTD cartridge) and giant dropper (won't lock) having to be warrantied after a month of use, I love the bike and hope we will still be able to get 26ers in the future, but just look at the trance lineup now...

Did you ever stop to wonder if maybe the sales of their 26" bikes didn't justify them shipping them over? Maybe the demand for 29" bikes is far higher.

I know a lot of people here like to live in their bubble, where no one rides 29" bikes and everyone only rides 26" bikes, but unfortunately the vocal major demographic here is far from the one with the most purchasing power in this industry, especially when it comes to new.

Seriously, stop, step back, and take a look at the whole picture from the outside from a macroscopic view.

Cyrix, I think you have missed the point. Not against 29er, I think they make at lot of sense for a lot of people.
In Australia we do not have access to the same range of bikes that you do in the US. Giant are easily the largest seller of low to mid range bikes in Australia and in one year we had half a dozen 26er to choose from, now only two and its the same with the other major brands in the entry level bikes. It's a 29 or nothing
if your a 5 foot woman bad luck it's a 29er for you.
Giant made this decision not the consumer, most people starting mountain biking don't even realise that there are different wheel sizes.
Having worked in a shop for 10 years you can only sell what you have in stock and when you only have 29er that's what you have to sell.

WOW it has seriously already begun in AUS and NZ?! Anywhere else? I was like cyrix, wondering why the hell anyone would think 26" would disappear, but seeing as they are already experimenting with removing 26" on certain markets..... :o The kind of management behind such a decision... It MUST somehow be about the money, because if there is anyone in a powerful position in companies like Specialized and Giant that truly believes 29ers are best for everyone, I would lose all remaining faith.

Btw. cyrix when ppl say they dont like the look, or say it looks wrong, I think they mean that the way it looks gives you a feeling that tells you that its stupid from a mechanical or biomechanical (or any other aspect, like having fun) point of view. Much like how one might say they find two males kissing looks wrong, its not like the males suddenly look ugly.

This argument boils down to a simple human phenomenon: when backed into a corner, people will continue doing what they did previously, with more force, and determination. They tend not to look for alternate soluitions.

Complaining about new product releases won't change anything. The manufacturers will need you to vote with your wallet. If you can't vote with your wallet, then you don't get a say. Sorry, it may not seem fair, but this is how it works. If you can only afford sub $2000.00 bikes, and vote for 26" wheels, that is the market that will get them. The current AM voting is weighing heavily in the 650b camp. I can afford new equipment, and will be voting for 650b. I have one, like it, and think its a big enough revolution that I won't buy 26" again, other than on a pump track bike or something like that.

Specialized has a lot of eggs n the 29er basket, and they are willing to throw engineering resources at a bike like this. It would be interesting to see what happens to the market if they had three versions of the enduro: a 26", a 650b conversion based on the 26", and the 29er.

I believe the manufacturers mainly decide which way things are going, what is going to be promoted, what is going to be popular and what most people are going to want to buy. They do not so much need you to 'vote with your wallet', they just use campaigning and media to tell you what to vote lol. I think the majority of 'votes' is simply bought with lies like 'active suspension', 'independent linkage' (paradox by itself) and 'isolating forces' (another paradox). Behavioral sciences, socioeconomics, psychology, etc., things top managers are very much aware of and know how to exploit. The current standings on wheel sizes are their product, not a reflection of what people really need.

Maybe someone just disagreed with what you said. Why do "props" even matter? If you believe in what you say, then stand by it and screw the negative props. Because you really shouldn't care about them.

In the authors final conclusion he asks the question, do we need 650b if the difference between the 26 and 29 is (in his opinion) is only a small one and he still prefers his 26.Is there a need for another wheel size? If the difference between these two bikes was massive I could see the argument, but its notI'm not saying any wheel size is better or worse, just different, but you have to ask the question is it really a big enough advantage to warrant the extra expense to the manufacturers and customer.If I just purchased a 650b or 29 I'd want my decision to be justifiable the same as if I'd invested in a 26 and I can see the merits of 29er for many applications and riders.I'm not against innovation, quite the opposite. I want the latest and greatest but there comes a point you have to ask, are they just creating a new market for no real advantage, except to help them sell more bikes? What if all of a sudden car manufacturers decided that the standard car rim size wasn't good enough ( yes I. know we have 4wd) and we all had to choose between 3 wheel sizes and that the car you have invested thousands of dollars is going to be obsolete.Would be be angry? Bloody oath they would and you'd be asking is the advantage great enough to warrant it.With that being said that's why I bought a mojo HD, I'm covering my arse.

On the other hand, when it is time to buy a new bike when my old one is worn out, I would like the option of trying the results of the incremental upgrades that have happened over a few years. If nothing changes, them my 2015 bike will be the same as my 2011 or 2012. I will just be replacing with an equivalent model.

BTW, auto wheels come in 12". 13", 14", 15", 16", 17" 18", 19" etc. There are 16.5" truck rims and the little used metric sizes. The range of widths in addition to diameters is even more diverse. How is this a disadvantage? The best size will be available for the consumer depending on their needs. Manufacturers have different bolt patterns and different offsets as well, often even front and back are different width and offset.

In regards to being able to use my old wheels on my new bike: Most of my 4+ year old wheels are 20mm internal or less, excepting my DH wheels, but they would be 3000g. I don't know why I would want to run my modern tires on those old wheels. If I upgrade the rim, then I am OK with a different diameter, as I will get new spokes anyway. I'm not seeing the downside. I have a 6" travel double crown with qr in the garage. I can't imagine using it for anything. Its compatible with my old wheels I guess.

Willie 1. The example of rim size was incorrect, but I'm sure you could see where I'm coming from. I'm assuming that you wouldn't always need to change your suspension to change rim size ( depends on what you put on) and the basic five bolt design is an industry standard. I'm not certain of this, please correct me if I'm wrong.I think you make some really good points, and this contributes to the debate in a positive way rather than the 29er are gay, 26er are dinosaurs and 650b are the new black.The real purpose of these debates should be to convinced that formats that we once held dear, can be done in a better way and offer real advantages, not just ways of making us upgrade more often.

@maxman6000 I think you're making the assumption that the question is already answered when Matt Wragg says, "It also throws light back onto the question of whether or not we need 650B bikes when 29ers can handle like this." Really I'm not blowing the 29" horn but I find the difference between 26" and 29" to be a huge one in terms of frame design (linkage etc) and performance (that isn't to say that I think one is per se 'better' than the other, because genuinely believe that 26" bikes are better on certain trails than others). Anyway to the point; frankly, I think it's great to have choice! For some twenty niners will be too far down the line for trail/AM riding so they will have 650B and for others XC/trail 29 will be just right and for others DH/FR 26 will be better. As for what's going on in OZ and NZ, I can't really have answer for that but it seems to me that it's a fairly isolated instance (not to say that makes it OK for you - sorry about that).

Not really making that assumption jackclark89, I think it's a long way from being answered and will not be anytime soon, just have to look at the reactions on this forum to see there is a lot of entrenched ideas. Doesn't seem to me that the manufacturers can offer all three sizes over the long run, and having owned a shop (not a bike shop) I don't think they can afford to hold that sort of range in stock, think one might eventually need to go. But who knows where it'll end up maybe all three sizes, I quite like that idea. Time will tell

@ Maxman6000: There are numerous bolt patterns. The 4 bolt on my mustang is different from a chevy. Look at any custom wheel site, and you will see, 3,4,5,6,8 bolt patterns, and numerous offsets and widths. The bicycle industry is significantly more compatible in regards to interchange than the auto or motorcycle industry.

Nothing disgusting with thinking that all the people, all the companies, etc... are legitimately only trying to completely screw you out of your hard earned money, and in no way shape or form are AT ALL trying to provide you with a product that's any good, and are in fact only trying to provide you with products that are WORSE and more expensive?

My point is that a lot of people here actually think in a manner very similar to that. I see people spout that kind of idea very very often and get upvoted to kingdom come for it showing people support and believe that idea. That is disgusting. If they really think the industry is that hell bent on destroying their wallets and livelihood then why even participate?

Fair enought and I agree with you, without the industry constantly challenging themselves and trying to improve on existing technology I wouldn't be riding the kick arse bike I'm now riding.
I suppose the point I was trying to make was, that just because it's new doesn't necessarily make it better, often it is but I need some convincing.
There is no evil conspiracy to make us spend money, I would have thought that was self evident, but apparently not.

What is the BB height? If a long travel 29er is built on a platform like DW-link, where there is a higher pivot point and more rearward travel in the suspension, wouldn't it be easier to deal with rear tire clearance? It would reduce the need for a severely off-set seat tube.

BB is 335mm. You will find that most wheel paths on linkage bikes have about the same amount of rearward travel. Plus you have to balance the pedaling performance and suspension performance with axle path so everything is in check.

Didn't realize that. So then is the only way to get a really rearward axle path with an idler-pulley( like canfield bros)? If you could get the axle path to run somewhat parallel to the seat tube, then clearance wouldn't be an issue, and would it not perform better on bumps? It would have to pedal well- the rearward movement means pedaling torque would push the sus higher into its travel as power is applied to the rear wheel, into the chainstays, and the rest of the bike.

You are correct - you really need some sort of chain redirection to achieve a significant rearward axle path, ala Canfield or Zerode. In theory, a rearward path should absorb bumps better, but the jury is out as to whether or not that translates into faster. There are drawbacks to too much rearward action. It can be tough to manual because the wheel moves back at the same time you are moving your weight back and you have to over compensate your weight shift to get over the back wheel. Also, the wheel base grows which slows your cornering in high G big sweepers and other situations. Again, it’s all about finding a fast balance of all the variables.

Another interesting point about rearward axle path that i only realized a few days ago, is that it might carry more speed on the compression stroke, but anything gained will be taken back on the rebound stroke. Basically the bike will push forward on compression but pull back the same amount on rebound, effectively cancelling each other.
Its also funny how some manufacturers will hype their rearward path with an out of scale graph but if you look at the charts it is less then 5-6 mm lol.

Jason-at-Specialized: That's really interesting, thanks. I just got a norco range, which is 10 lbs lighter and 20mm less travel than my old bike (SC Bullit), but it is almost impossible to manual even though it is much more poppy in every other way. I knew it had to be something to do with the suspension, and that makes a lot of sense.

That is not true, because the wheel rotates. The wheel hits a bump and compresses, but it doesn't return until after the bump event. Its just like having a more raked out front end (or shallower head tube angle, to be more precise). When the shock is rebounding, it does so because the back side of the bump is there, and there is no more compression on the shock. The is no extra drag because the wheel rolls down the back side.

@hamncheez, with a rearward axle path, the wheelbase extends under compression.....so when you hit a bump...this will effectively try to push the bike in a forward fashion...(the front wheel wants to move forward)at that instant the bike speed will be greater. On the other side of the bump, the wheelbase will shorten again on the rebound stroke to return to its original state. At that particular moment, the bike is trying to bring the front wheel towards the back....effectively slowing you down. There might be a small positive gain in forward motion due to the fact that there is quite a bit of damping on the rebound stroke (rebound will be slower as energy has dissipated in heat) meaning the rebound stoke would performed less mechanical work then the compression. If it wasn't for the damping...the energy balance would have to cancel out.

So you might be right after all......I am not sure if this minimal gain would be noticeable in a real world situation tough. I would love to learn more on the subject.

Wow, so if we have a bike with super long travel and rearward axle path, and you would hit a massive bump you would SHOOT forward?! And then on the rebound fly back again?! "There might be a small positive gain in forward motion"?!?!?! So you actually speed up?! Perpetuum mobile!! This is awesome! Call NASA!

Sorry for making fun of you :p, it's cool you think about these things. If you like these kind of things you should really check out the free demo of Linkage, on bikechecker.com. It's suspension analysis software with a massive database of mountain bikes (click web library when opening) that lets you compare things like axle path, anti-squat curves, pedal-kickback, leverage ratio, all you want. The manual explains all.

So about your perpetuum mobile. If you put the back wheel of your bike against the wall and compress the suspension, yes the frame will move forward, cus the back wheel itself cannot move backwards. When you are on a trail and riding over bumps there is no wall to keep the rear wheel from moving backwards, so the mass of the frame (and partly rider) just say f*ck you to the rear wheel, I'm not letting you push me forward, I'm much heavier than you, and pushes the rear wheel backwards much much more than the frame is pushed forward (moment of inertia). Its exactly like firing a gun, where the unsprung weight of the bike's rear is the bullet. The fact that wheelbase changes during all this is just a consequence, just some measurement. So when riding over bumps, the rearward AP causes the rear wheel to move backwards relative to the frame, so its velocity relative to the ground is slower than that of the bike, giving it more time to ride over the obstacle, also decreasing forces in several different ways.

Now if the rear wheel weighed literally a ton, yes the frame would move forward on hitting a bump, and move backwards on the backside. But no matter what the rebound damping, the ton of rear wheel would just pull the frame backwards after the bump, not the frame pulling a ton forwards.

Bottom line: as long as no energy is put into the system that is the bike (frame+wheels+suspension), it cannot possibly propel itself.

We are not talking about gaining speed bouncing the bike up and down. we are talking about a bike rolling over a bump. Obviously you did not consider the friction forces acting on your tires in you assertion.

Obviously if the wheelbase will extend it will push the bike forward.....the rear wheel cannot go backwards on a bike without backpedaling (the chain links the wheel to the crankset).......unless the tire would lock up and skid which we know is not the case while riding.

So yes you can assume that the rear wheel is fixed and the bike is moving through the front wheel. Which means that the front wheel will be moving towards the back of the bike on the rebound. You also forgot to take into consideration the "rider pedaling" scenario. Obviously the rear wheel is not going to move backwards.

To add to your post, even in the linkage software the rear wheel is fixed and the front wheel extends on rear shock compression.

Perhaps this subject is a little bit above your head.

We are not talking about a bike accelerating, but about a bike having less deceleration with a rearward wheel path.....I think that was clear for everyone.

I was not talking about gaining speed bouncing the bike up and down (rider input), I was talking about a bike rolling over a bump (which is actually the same for the rear suspension (reference frames), just different angle at which forces attack the rear wheel). 'Obviously' you are oblivious to the difference between static friction and rolling friction. 'Obviously' your assertions did not consider how insignificant rolling resistances between road and tire, and between axle and hub are.Quote: "Obviously if the wheelbase will extend it will push the bike forward"; yes, 'obviously', call NASA!

Obviously, considering the scenario of a rider pedaling is useless since that is rider input and it should be rather obvious that rider input can be used to give a net propulsion forward.Obviously you did not see the checkbox named "Horizontal mode" in the Linkage software, and 'obviously' do not understand the concept of reference frames (seriously tho, this is where you go completely awry).

But most obvious of all is that you have no need or want for my help, so I'm out and good luck to you. And then I will go straight back to all my mechanical engineering books, and Tony Foale's and Vittore Cossalter's books, cus this is all over my head and I need to review physics and I'm talking gibberisch lol :p

@TheBiggestPicture, i know exactly the difference between static friction (tire traction) and rolling friction ( which can be taken out of the formula in this instance as both tires have sensibly the same) the traction of the tire combined with the chain linking the rear wheel is the reason why the rear wheel will not rotate backwards without back pedalling the bike. This could only happen if the tire was slipping.

I know exactly what a reference frame is, what i was describing earlier was a bike tracking the ground. The only way your previous physics would be applicable is for a bike taking of a jump and the rebound stroke is with the bike in mid air. Your reference frame is a bike floating in mid air. ( horizontal mode in linkage does not apply to bike on the ground and only reflects a bike floating )

It is nice to see that you have changed your position on wether the front wheel would travel forward on compression. You were saying earlier that it was the rear wheel moving out of the way. Either that or you are contracting yourself.

The scenario of a rider pedalling is totally relevant since it is a bicycle and that is what it is intended to do. I was trying to explain that when pedalling, the pedal kick back will not be strong enough to back pedal the bike. Instead the suspension would be stiffening up due to the chain growth. Therefore the rear wheel cannot rotate backwards.

You did not explain how I was wrong in your last post.....and i still don't understand where you stand on the rear axle path....what are you trying to say?

Its easy to throw fancy words around.....but you should be cautious about their meaning.

I def think that those mechanical engineering books are too advanced for this topic, we are talking high school material here. You should understand the basic statics and dynamics before moving on to the deeper stuff.

Well its not a bike I need to consider as the idiots at Spesh UK are not officially taking into the UK their 26" flagship version - so I'd be total confused if they took the 29" version.

Spesh UK if you are reading this - have a word with yourselves. Enduro is the fastest growing scene in mountainbiking right now, in particularly in the UK. Your flagship circ £6500 bike currently appears to be the lightest most capable gravity enduro bike and for some crazy reason you are offering the bottom of the range alloy versions in coil and air sprung, but not the flagship model - what is the logic behind that? I wanted to buy the top of the line version or at least the carbon frameset, both being sold all over the world, but NOT the UK????

After a bit of calling around I finnally found out through a concept store that Spesh UK were taking "unofficially" 20 frames into the UK. What the hell is "unofficailly". I jumped at the opportunity. When it came to placing the deposit by phone. I was told. That will be 20% deposit, the frames are due in March (this was Dec) so 20% of £2600 (frame only) then a voice in the background said something and the lad said, "my mistake 20% of £3000. Me: WHAT? £3K for the frame only?? Its only a carbon front end. Its still an alloy back end with Cane Creek air, that's the most expensive enduro frame by a long shot - no thanks. "

Shifty marketeering. Creating a shortage - where there is none. Also hides the fact its a crappy and shortlived product on cartwheels and their real gravity bike is a bit of a doitall but nothing right either kind of bummer.
And no its not the most capable gravity enduro - that award goes to Intense, Foes, Orange. Incedently they also sell the real deal. The spec is a xc-bike.

"The first thing you notice when you start going downhill on this bike, from the very first pedal stroke, is how fast it is. It picks up speed alarmingly. Even rolling into a straight from the trailhead it seems to find speed from nowhere."

Yeah, sounds legit, because law of physics do not apply to 29" wheels. It can absorbs free and magical energy from the air, and automatically output more power than what you put into the pedals.

People used to think 29er have lower rolling resistance over rocks and roots. But this proves that 29ers just pick up speed through divine intervention.

Actually the laws of physics do apply and the 29 inch wheel's considerably lower approach angle to trail obstacles is what results in what you mockingly refer to as divine intervention. I've never heard anybody claim 29 is easier to climb---the contrary being the case except for that sneaky little law of physics called inertia which also relates to the divine speed thing. The 29 wheel, once rolling, carries a higher moment of inertia than the 26. The laws of physics apply to 29 wheels, and predictably.

Moment of inertia factor is negligible. If that was the case, you could just ride heavier tires on 26" and achieve the exact same effect.

Rolling resistance difference is also very small. Tire choice is by far more important.

What IS different is biomechanical comfort when pedaling over obstacles. Less spikes in resistance. It is real, and it is much more noticeable on hardtails. What is even more important is bike fit and stability. Trail and CG in relation to wheel axles.

Larger wheels have distinct advantages. Up to a point. And you can not get around the fact that weight increases linearly and stiffness decreases as cube of wheel radius/frame dimensions.

"Larger wheels have distinct advantages. Up to a point. And you can not get around the fact that weight increases linearly and stiffness decreases as cube of wheel radius/frame dimensions".

This is the only thing that I really wrestle with with 9'er and the overall fit of course. I never cared for 9'ers in the past, but now they are made to be more maneuverable, more travel, slacker, more DH friendly while still very pedable, that I am starting to become intrigued. The main drawback for me is the potential for loss of stiffness in the wheel as stated above since I already have to run straight gauge spokes, wider/stout rims, thicker tire sidewalls and higher tire pressures on my trail bike in effort to minimize any extra wheel flex when ridden hard. One of my pet peeves on a bike, outside of frame flex and pivot play of course .

when faith and business are involve than who care for the law of physics. For the companies and the "journalists" it about business and for the 29' believers its become a religion so if you are a true believer you can fly even without wings. BTW with two wheel it doesn't matter how you roll over since they would never roll as well as when you have more and wider wheels anyway - what you do need is maneuverability so you can jump over things and use any obstacle on the trail to your advantage - then again when you are riding real slow it may not be possible and then maybe this strange 29 would make more sense..

The author was pretty clear he presumed he was not going to like the bike. He doesn't like 650b either from what he says. The fact that he liked the bike in the end suggests specialized did a pretty good job of managing the space limitations of the wheel/frame. His wording is a bit childish and sensationalistic, but the message in the end is clear. The bike works well.

I would suggest the author do some research on geometry. The wandering front end on climbs is less a result of the height of the front end, and more directly related to the slack head anngle and the resultantly extra lengthy trail number. Trail has a huge impact on steering feel, and a slack head angle lengthens trail on a 29er more than on a 26er. Unfortunatly, people buying the bike will have a hard time wrapping their head around the idea that the bike might be more effective with a 68 or 68.5 deg HA, as 66 and 67 are the buzz numbers now. Those numbers result in the feel the author describes.

I'm confused on the brake and drive train setup??? Why use a 7 inch rotor on a 29 inch rear wheel, especially when it's supposed to be a hybrid DH bike. No wonder the test rider couldn't stop. All hyped up on going bigger with 29ers but won't go bigger on brakes.... And Sram has put numerous reports on how you DON'T need a chain guide for the XX1... so who is lying, Specialized or Sram?

In theory XX1 should work without a chainguide, after all, that's what Jerome Clementz runs, but I imagine Spesh put a chainguide on just in case. Apart from gaining a bit of weight, there is no penalty in just fitting a seat tube chain guide, it's just a bit of extra security that, if the rider desires, they can remove with no issues.

Re chain guide, when SRAM approached Jerome Clementz to proto test on XX1, they told him to run it without a guide. He said no. They tried again and he said no again, but agreed to run just a top guide. After some testing, he took the top guide off. I am running XX1 on my 12 Enduro expert Evo, without a guide, and have not dropped a chain. At 220 plus gear, I can bomb down a trail pretty hard just with gravity. I replaced the stock XO brakes with Codes last year and upped the rear rotor to a 200 to match the front on my large size Evo. I had good experience with the Codes on my DH bike and I needed way more stop than I could get out of the stock XOs. The XO trails, in the experience of my friends running them, is that they work well with lighter loads. A friend who proto tests for Niner and is about 5-3 is running them on his Jet 9 RDO right now but after a race this weekend is planning on moving them over to the Rip. He turned in a top 30 overall time at the Nevada state DH champs in January at Bootleg Canyon--which is notoriously rocky and gnarly if you haven't been there--out of a field of nearly 200 racers and he was on the Rip 9 RDO. Cat I 30-39, if that matters.

Based on some write-ups, how well my 2012 stumpy 29er rides, I am convinced this is a legit bike. I got 2 months to sell my bike and hopefully my shop will get a demo to ride before I pull the trigger. Looks sick

Nice how they managed the fairly short (not very short) chainstay length. But that's a very long wheelbase. The XL is 53mm longer than an XL Mojo HD 26". I have both 29'er and 26" bikes, and an open mind, but the 29er's long wheelbase limits manoevrability in tight stuff and the relatively high front end does make the front wheel want to wander and lift on stupidly steep ascents - a problem that is bad enough for any XL-sized rider whose high seat position tips the seat all too easily behind the rear axle. If I was just smashing bike park downhills all day that might not matter but, here in the real world, too many trails need better versatility to keep up with the chase. Notwithstanding that it looks a great bike for people who don't care about tight stuff and I VERY MUCH LIKE the exagerated layback real seat angle because it will pull a 'dropped' seat extra far forward - even further out of the way of snagging your trouser crotch for descending steep sh1t - on a mixed trail weekend that may make it possible to fit a slightly longer stem than otherwise to help control that front end climbing wander. I wonder if they had to exagerate the rearward rear axle path to accomplish the 155mm rear travel though? + the mud clearance to the seat stay cross brace doesn't look sufficient to really suit muddy UK winter conditions. Oh, and an Enduro should have a 36mm stanchion fork not the 34 in my humble opinion for the thrashing it should expect. Am glad they fit the Talas - for tall riders and especially on 29ers they do help a lot climbing super steep.

I asked Specialized if they altered the rear axle path to provide more clearance for the 29-inch wheel and they said no. The Enduro 29 uses similar suspension geometry to its 26er Enduro cousin. They didn't want to compromise the suspension performance.
RC

I'm going to puke if I hear one more person say long wheelbase on the 29" limits maneuverability in tight stuff. An equivalent size Demo has at least a 30mm longer wheelbase than this Enduro 29" yet you won't hear anyone on a Demo say "oh I was really struggling to get through that tight stuff back there" It's a total myth.

Comparing an XL Enduro to an XL Mojo HD is misleading. I'm sure you've noticed that the Enduro has a 12mm longer effective top tube than the Mojo HD. So yeah, it's going to have a longer wheelbase. The Mojo is a pretty small XL. No mystery there.

This 29" Enduro in XL actually has a shorter wheelbase than my XL Enduro from 2010 and I haven't had any issue climbing or descending pretty much every trail on the Shore so stop whining. These bikes also have some of the steepest seat tubes available, again, great for taller riders.

If you've got a problem with the 34mm stanchions maybe you should take it up with Fox. It's not like there are any other options. I haven't ridden one extensively yet, but many people are saying that today's 34 is equivalent in stiffness to 36s past due to improvements in design, especially given the different physics of the 29" wheel.

The 34 on this bike would immediately stop me from buying it ... at least until the Lyrik 29 comes out. @alexin, anyone that tells you that the 34 chassis is nearly as stiff as stiff as a 36 chassis is either a lightweight or doesn't push their bike hard enough. While the 34 is far stouter than the 32, it s not nearly as stout as a 36 when the going gets rough. My 36 180 is far stiffer in every direction than my 34 29er @ 120mm travel. I've pummelled my Tallboy and Nomad down some pretty steep an rough trails.

I can't tell exactly if it's 34mm, but it doesn't look much bigger than the Fox 34. If this is the fork we've been waiting for then prepare to be underwhelmed. I would love for the RS fork to be a bit burlier than the Fox, if only to create another option.

@alexsin, it looks like we're very close in height and weight (I'm 6'5" and 230 lbs). On my TallboyC I went from a Fox 32 to a Fox 34 and the difference was enormous on the Shore trails. I'm going to try a Rev 29 soon because they're much stiffer than the Fox 32s but I don't expect it to be as stiff as the 34.

Apparently the RS fork is a Lyrik 29 which I would buy in a heartbeat. Waiting for the Nomad 29 though!

Geez, that picture looks like a Psylo with the bulges on the outside where the arch meets the lowers!
I've seen one other picture that was different than that fork and it was definitely Lyrik-ish. I'll try to find it.

Dirt magazine have done a brilliant job seeking out and championing great bikes like the YT Tues (/2.0) which I could conceivably buy. Better yet with the money I save I could afford to visit new places that would push my riding far more than a 100% carbon super bike.

First off, sick bike, stoked for all you tall ppl out there who have been waiting on a proper trail bike. Secondly, it seems very strange to me all the internet reviews dropped the same day and used very similar descriptions of the bike. Obviously the reviews had to match what Specy wanted the world to know about their new bike. i dont know why people get so upset when a company releases a new bike and utilizes different wheel standards. WE have the power, the consumer, it is up to us what succeeds and what fails in the market. 650b only exists here in the blogisphere. I have seen a few in the real world years ago, they are not on the trails, not in the shops, and only a handful of riders seem to be stoked on them. I cant be disappointed with the market trend to make "funner" bikes. Slacker HTA and more travel, all seems like a good thing to me, in addition, whatever it takes to get more ppl on bikes IS a good thing. Hurray bikes!

" It also throws light back onto the question of whether or not we need 650B bikes when 29ers can handle like this........ Would I trade my 26-inch Enduro for the newer, bigger-wheeled version? Probably not, as personally I still prefer the immediacy of the smaller wheels, but it's a far closer call than I would have ever imagined it could be." First off, I have nothing against any wheel size, and this is the first time I've ever commented on anything on PB. In my opinion, he kind of answered his own question about whether or not we need 650b. If the 29er handled well, yet you wouldn't trade your 26" Enduro because you prefer the immediacy of the smaller wheels, isn't that the spot where the 650B would fit nicely? Some of the great points of the 29er with a lot more of the "immediacy" of the 26" that 29" can't match. If the 29er Enduro handles so surprisingly, wouldn't a 650b version be even more impressive in a bike that is designed to be an aggressive handler? Maybe if there ever was a 650b Enduro to test it would bring to light that point exactly. That's what a lot of the companies going 650b realized. Riders who like aggressive trail/AM riding want the snappiness of 26" but could benefit from bigger wheel advantages can find a happy home with 650b. Like another earlier comment said as well, they would be able to accomodate smaller riders and be able to sell frames in a full range, not just M, L, XL.

I was going to make the exact same point. a 650b version could be made in small sizes as well. Remember that Specialized got caught with its pants down, and didn't think the market was going to accept 650b. They were wrong (they must have only used pinkbike as their focus group, and not the rest of the MTB world.) Another wonderfully lacking piece of journalism from pinkbike.

I wouldn't say it's a lacking piece of journalism though. It's a great article, and it's a great bike, no doubt. Like I said in my comment, I've got nothing against any wheel size. I just had to point out the fact that a 650B option may just be more effective for an AM/Enduro bike than 29" may be. Maybe we'll see the bike offered in 29, and 650B and no 26" by 2014. It sure looks like the industry is leaning towards 650B in some of the market.In the end though, it's a good thing that the industry is giving riders these options. I wouldn't say it's just "marketing" to get our hard earned money. Progress is good for us all, and being open minded to new technology, wheel size, etc, is a wise approach. You gotta remember this is an industry built around having fun. I can only imagine this bike is fun as hell.

"Remember that Specialized got caught with its pants down, and didn't think the market was going to accept 650b."

not at all, they stood back and spent their time researching and riding the different wheel sizes. A company that large (and successful) does not continue to achieve good sales by making snap decisions on new trends in the market?

The companies that got caught napping were the companies who did not embrace the big 29" wheel and found themselves marginalized whilst Specialized, Trek, Giant, etc. reaped the sales benefit of the 29'er movements (despite not being "early adopters" like some of the 29er pioneers)

something to remember that is whilst the average Pinkbike member is a hardcore biker, the mass market (where companies make their money) has found the 29er a very favourable solution for recreational trail riding (that is what most "mountain bikers" are doing, not FR, DH or Dirt Jump)

what is happening if you look closely is that these smaller companies have embraced 650B to create a unique selling point in an overcrowded market, where the big companies are doing VERY good business with 29'er bikes (although ROAD bikes are a much bigger market for these companies...)

I've ridden all 3 sizes and found 26" and 650B too close to be markedly different, whereas 29'er is markedly different to 26" to justify a different wheel size for the mountain bike market

Its been pretty well known that larger companies have slower development cycles than smaller ones. This is the reason in motorsports Honda is often more conservative, when smaller companies like KTM can adapt quicker to niche markets. Specialized did actually admit they didn't think 29ers would catch on, and have now invested heavily into it.

They have two choices, scrap the last couple years of development and bring out 650b models, or market what they have and use their clout in the industry to push through while they fasttrack 650b models. They definitely won't mention a 650b enduro as a mid year release, as they need to market this model for the forseeable future. What are they supposed to say? This bike is REALLY good, but we think we could do better with a 650b. Spend 9k on this one and trade it in when we get the next one ready..

I am rocking a Stumpy 29'er and could not be happier with its performance?

especially on the DH where many commented I would be slower, but a skilled rider on a 29'er is actually picking up 'free' momentum (the inertia effect of 29er wheels) and then more concerned about being able to slow down, than worrying about the bigger wheels holding you back...

I've been saying the same thing about my Stumpy 29 Evo since I got it this summer.
A 29er is not going to make you ride faster by just jumping on it. But a rider with a proper skill and a little bit of balls will definitley see the benefits of the larger wheels. I find my biggest problem is slowing down as well. Until I adjusted to gain in speed, I had some solid collisions with trees on trails I've ridden a thousand times.
Once I realized just how hard you can push the bigger tires and how far you lean the thing over...I was sold.

good points you raise. It does take some time and adjustment to get the most from a 29'er

it was the same issue when front suspension forks, and then when full suspension bikes were introduced. I was there during those early years (we started with fully rigid bikes), and remember first with the suspension forks, and later with the full suspension, going MUCH quicker into corners and over rough terrain, and having to adapt and learn how to get the most from the new technology

I have found the same aspect with using a well designed 29'er; for a skilled rider there is at first a learning curve, and then a serious speed advantage both on flatter terrain and also technical terrain (which surprised me).

a big problem for many riders "trying" or "testing" a 29'er is that they don't have this time to adapt, and perhaps 'write off' the merits of the bigger wheel? when the simple truth is that you cannot ride a 29'er like a 26" and expect the same results?

it takes time to learn how to get the most from a 29'er, just like suspension systems.

something I have found is rolling speed is much higher whether going up(climb), along(singletrack) or downhill, and wheel grip is much higher, especially on loose surface on flat corners. Learning how to keep those bigger wheels rolling (flow), and deal with the higher speeds you are rolling at, takes some time

I would only buy another 26" bike for serious DH or FR (Specialized Demo 8 for example)

I remember my first thoughts after rallying a 29er for the first time, "Man...that was different and I don't quite have it dialed, but man, if I figure this out it's got incredible potential."

I believe those who despise 29ers fall into one or more of a few relativley easily definable categories.

1. They have never ridden one and think riding a 29er somehow diminishes your shred factor. (DH Grom Mentality)2. They have ridden one and dismissed it immediatley because it felt different and did not immediatley make them faster. (Caveman Mentality)3. They have ridden one and don't have the skill set to understand what is actually happening underneath them and appreciate the potential. (Squid Mentality)4. They are very short. (Napolean Complex)

I feel bad for the Groms, Cavemen, Squids, & Napoleans out there...b/c in the right hands, a 29er can rip.

Yeah...my comments are why people don't like 29ers. Makes perfect sense.
I apologize for the grammatical errors...big thumbs and an iPhone. I did not intend to offend your delicate sensibilities.
Again...best of luck with that sense of humor thing and congratulations on the obvious enormity of your success.

You've probably been around long enough that you remember when suspension forks and then full suspension bikes hit the market. This all has a very similar feel to me. People who are adverse to change digging their heels in the ground and making declaratory statements about things they believe they know to be absolute.

I think it can only be good though. Companies and engineers pushing the limits of what can be done with bike design, materials, wheel size, and geometry can only be good for us all.

I just have a hard time not laughing at the people who declare in absolute terms that 29ers are garbage, with no real reasoning.

haha, donch. sadly enough i was there @ the birth of onza and when u could visit syncros in bc! i do think it's important to try something new in this case. i've tried/owned the first 29ers (fishers, custom soulcraft ht) out as well as the current crop (pivot, spesh, and a pretty cool canfield) but my mindset/skillset still prefers 26.

gettin older, i do have less time to ride and even less time to decide. so, i just run what i brung. haha. the opposing views and opinions you listed make sense but those are the ones you can't live without to go forward with anything. i'm always down for progression of riding for mtb, bmx, & moto. i enjoy watching you younguns sending as much as watching me and my old crew fredding a simple gap or step down! haha. ride on!

If you flew me to Italy to ride a 10,000$ bike, I would think it is pretty awesome too. People that are fans of the 26er Enduro are pretty tough customers so lets make sure they ride some cool trails in a foreign country on our dime to make sure they think its the best thing ever...

that said, if it rides as good as the numbers suggest, this kills the argument for 650b.

Guess what happens when you add 6 inches off travel to an already slow 29er? You get a bike that feels twangy around the switchbacks, slow on the climbs and have all that travel that is not required. Gary Fisher knows best adding more than 140mm of travel to a 29er will be a disadvantage. We all get that the folks at Specialized want to make you feel "Special" but 9k for this bike is for the suckers only.

as long as they leave us the option of choosing between 26 and 29... i don't really care how many size wheels they want to launch in the market, do a 56er if you want, but don''t kill the 26er... they are already killing it here in australia. The only 2013 models that still carry a 26 wheel on the specialized rage are: the stumpy evo aluminium version, the enduro and the dh bike, all other models including all other models on the stumpy fsr are only available in 29er versions (in Australia). The question is: why? if they are still available why not give people the option for choosing what they want to ride? I love my stumpy expert evo 26er, and for the looks of it it looks like she will be my last specialized bike, as so far i haven't ridden a 29er that i like, so no i will not convert in to a 29er anytime soon....

A few things- #1 I like 29ers but don't want to ride one as my main ride. I am somewhat considering adding a DB Mason long travel hard tail to go with my Scapegoat. That's about it. #2 150mm Fox 34, about friggin time. But they missed the mark if they want to really say "Hey 29ers are bada$$ long travel machines" they should just put a 20mm axle and 36mm stanchions and go all the way...if your gonna go big don't go half way you won't make the gap.

My own personal experience with an xc 29er for a season was my best ever "all mountain" lap times, but least amount of creative lines on the trail. Now back to 26 again for the fun factor. I am 6 feet tall and was really comfortable on big wheels, but I couldn't slam corners the same and just felt too far away from the trail to really work with it. Again, it was fast, just didn't feel that way.

"So I just went steaming in and prayed. After a few of those moments, a realization dawned on me. It wasn't blind faith getting me through the corners, but the bike. Once I started to trust it and give it some muscle, I began to understand just how capable this bike was." This is what people having been saying about 29er's all along! I can say myself it is true.

When all is said and done and I am ready to buy a new rig in a year or two I won't have any idea where to start. I'm going to spend a fortune just to demo a bunch on rigs. I am starting to miss the good old days when I could at least limit myself to a wheel size.

Taiwanese manufacturers are loving our infatuation with wheel sizes. Why not make a frame that converts on the fly from 26er to 650b? Just swap the wheelset and your off. Btw I patented this idea so back off DW.

this is probably my least favorite review to date, just about everything was negative and seemed a bit biased on things
not too happy with this review pb, it would be cool if you told things straight up

• Command Post Blacklight Dropper: Bad - the Specialized mechanical dropper had slightly too much air pressure in it and nearly took out one of my testicles. Good - after I'd taken some air out of the system, an easy job of popping the post off the bike and opening the valve at the base, it worked as well as I hoped it would.

Bottom line on this is I will have to compare it to my Stumpy FSR Carbon Elite on the tight stuff. I am already pretty tall so a tall long travel bike just seems to add to my difficulty when riding. I"ll probably convert my current trail rig to 650b since I have the tire clearance. I'm honestly looking forward to the Yeti SB95c because the rear end on the AL SB95 was stiff and smooth under my 240lb+ riding weight.

I guess It's time I sell my Tallboy LTc to get a smaller frame since I'm only 5'5". Too many people get hung up on numbers. My medium LTc is setup with a 50mm stem, 750mm bars and it's great that way.

I had a small Nomad before and I don't miss it (rode it 4 years). If you can try, go for it. This Enduro looks great. Longer TT, Higher Stand Over Height and longer WB. Nowadays, you can't really go wrong with any bike...

I am fine with 29ers. But my 6 inch bike is meant to be playful, stiff, slack and corner hard. 29ers carry a noticeable amount of extra weight in there wheels which is a big drag on punchy techy trails, are floppier, but some do corner nice. Tho I'm sure a carbon wonder bike would solve most of it. But at 6'3" and over 200lb i enjoy the manhandling aspect of mountain biking the most, and wont give that up for any strava time whoring. Also.You'll have to pry my burly 6" 20mm axle fork from my cold dead hands!

I very much doubt I will need to adapt to anything for a long time. I can't see 55,lyric,36,vengeance style forks disappearing for good. Same with 2.4ish tires and suitable rims (wtb i23 currently which have been great!). ( caution rambling below..)

I guess I am more "pedally - lite freeride" then "enduro". I want stuff I can do 10-15 foot drops with, bash around and generally ride like a dh bike and climb technical weirdness. And I want to get 3-4 years out of it. I'm happy with low 30lb bikes, balancing minimal wheel weight with strength is big for me/ my trails. Bigger wheels will only add weight and reduce strength.

I enjoyed the 29er added smoothness, felt they handled fine in the bends, but the less snappy acceleration was a big negative for me. And the ones I've tried were flexy at over 7/10ths type riding. I'm sure Sworks amount of money fixes most of that, but why spend money for unwanted gain. I have lots of interests and think 4-5 grand is "enough" for a bike unless I start making big big bucks some day.

I do plan on a 29er hard tail tho. Probably steel rigid xc bike. I am no dead set against different wheel sizes per say, but numbness and lack of rigidity will not be accepted in my 6" bikes. Sorta like with cars, I guess I'd rather drive a slow car fast then a fast car slow.. (enough rambling for now.)

$10k bikes spec would make any (but not every) bike pretty good to ride - nothing like crisp shifting and great suspension with light wheels. But this married with good frame geo is even better. So you probably will get a great bike for 10k but i don't think it is worth in just wait a few years.

Well given that when an XT bike was $600 it had NO suspension, was made from a steel frame, no clipless pedals, and 18 speeds with thumbshifters and cantilever brakes... YES... it is evolution that now an X7 bike is $3500 given everything else it comes with.

You said it. Top of the line XT bike. I'm talking about the entry level. I dont care if the most expensive Enduro costs 50.000$, All I'm saying is that there must always be an affordable entry level model, for which you dont need to save for a decade in order to buy it.

Thanks Deeeight for the info - I have had a couple of Enduro Comps over the years, so I know roughly how much they retail for.
I bet a 29er Enduro Comp is pushing 35 lbs with pedals and a dropper post. That's getting pretty heavy for a bike that gets pedalled uphill if you ask me.

For $3500 you cannot get a similar bike for less from anyone else because nobody else makes a 29er with this things travel and suspension design as of yet. There are no other 4-bar linkage extra long travel 29ers to be had. The closest ones are 15mm less travel, and don't have access to these 150mm travel 29er forks which were developed FOR specialized. Fox does not have an aftermarket retail sale model Fox 34 29er with 150mm travel. You cannot simply duplicate this sort of bike buy taking frame from one guy, fork from another, and building with your own parts. You want to be in on the doorstep arrival of the new bikes with the new technology, you have to be willing to step up and pay for it. Bike companies are not in the business of rolling out new models to lose money.

The 26er Enduro Comp is the same price as the 29er Enduro Comp. It has 10mm more wheel travel. There is also the new Enduro EVO models that jump the rear travel (with 26" wheels) to 180mm and the front to 170mm. The cheapest of the two is the Enduro Evo 26er at $3200 with a Fox Van shock and X-Fusion Vengence fork and X7 drivetrain.

Never mind the wheel size, Spez is fixing the major flaw in its dropper post line, the crap saddle rail clamp! Top-flight quality, middle of the road pricing, mechanical (I favor this over hydraulic for reasons too wordy to get into here), and now with no obvious design flaws. Win!

Yes I had to replace my black lite on my Evo with a Lev bc the shitastic head clamp design on the black lite had my seat kicking back if I sat at all and hit a bump on a DH. Even after pulling it all the way apart, cleaning it, and friction pasting all four contact surfaces. I like the lighter weight of the black lite, am undecided about the three position vs infinite adjustability, but absolutely could not stand that damned clamp!

Heyyyy look, it's a shiny new bike, nice colours, bigger wheels and it rolls when you spin the cranks. Taking one look at this thing and you can tell this is a bike built with purpose. Well this is great for the MTB industry since it's more money for them! To the average rider .... it's got bigger wheels!?!!? WANT. So it's just a marketting ploy. So my advice? DEMO a couple out... (same goes for 27.5 or 650b) Trust the bike you think you could trust, not just because it has bigger wheels. No offense to Specialized, being a prior owner to an 26'' Epic, they're a great company, but they won't be earning my money today.

Innovative engineering that pushes through industry convention is not marketing hype. Engineering your products to meet an evolving market and technology is not marketing hype. Plus, take a look at the article on VitalMTB. A faster bike designed to meet a growing - and really cool - racing format is not hype.

My kid's 24" bike rolls when you spin the cranks, and I could probably use it to ride a trail. Joke's on me I guess. I actually bought into the hype and spent more money to by a bike with 26" wheels.

My suggestion is to try one and then decide. If you check all the reviews of people who have spent time on them, you will find the feedback overwhelmingly positive. Even @Wragg was prepared to hate it, but changed his mind. We would not have built if we didn't think people would benefit from it. Of course it may not be the bike of choice for everyone, but you owe it to yourself to find out if its the right bike for you.

Jason, don't forget people here can evaluate a bike based on the frame geometry charts and wheel size alone. Riding it is a mute point. I personally prefer boutique builders as I like to have something more unique, but this bike looks really good. I can't imagine a lot of crowding in this market either, with the emerging popularity of 650b.

I really hope the guy who decided Pinkbike Trail bike of the year to be the Santa Cruz Tallboy LTC gets to ride this thing next. I dont believe that this FSR linkage has less leverage than the previous FSR bikes. That shock could be very difficult to get the platform right when there is so much leverage. Also those wheels have revolution style spokes and I dont remember reading anywhere that longer spokes needed to be thinner and they were tough to get replacement parts for last year, 10,000$ on a bike and its worth 4000$ maybe a year later. Its a great 1 race run type bike. I think that 150mm+ travel should be reserved for 650b and 26" wheels but if there is a hole in the market Specialized will make you believe you need it. The rear stays are good being short but what does that do to the seattube angle and pedaling effectiveness for long climbs, and with that much travel at that slack of a head tube angle, you know that front wheel is out there like a downhill bike, probably a good inch over that Enduro S works, so how does that really make the handling better. Guess we will see who gets a million dollars to race one this year..

I think that I have to try the 26 and the 29 back to back to define the merits of each to myself. With the injuries I have , I have to climb with my right foot on the flat pedal like usual but I have to put my left heel on the axle area of my left flat as I have very little ankle strength.( I cant stand on left tip toes). My left toes hit the back of a 29 front wheel but not 26. I wonder if this 29 will do that, I like the 29 idea and have tried my friends Niner Jet 9. It rides well but I cant ride it, I wonder if a 27,5 would accomodate me better or will this one have room?

Had s works enduro 2010, had it six months flicked a stone off the front wheel into the down tube and damaged the carbon and frame was a right off!!! Specialized classed it as "crash damage" and offered me a replacement under there crash replacement scheme (still well over a thousand pound to replace !!!). So until I can be sure that down tube has been protected I'm forgeting carbon frames !!

i could break that in 5 rides or less. ive had to pour over 12k into my 2008 enduro comp, the only original part is the front triangle.if Specialized could set me up with one of these for a week i could find its weakness(es). i dbout the review would come in nearly as fawning as this one was.

Anyone who is hating simply has not tried it. I've been on the Stumpy 29er for the last 2 years, a 2011 expert model that I loved, and recently picked up a 2013 carbon EVO frame that I built up and have been rallying. The EVO is amazing,slacker geo, shorter chain stays, more travel, stiffer, faster, better ! All I can say is DAMMIT, now I gotta come up with 9K now? F- You Specialized !!! You should have had this out just a little earlier. Glad you finally got it all together. Can't wait to ride the abomination!!! HAHAHA, stupid haters....

I used to have a gary fischer sugar 292 a 2.1 pound series 9000 aluminum frame .It came with a 8 inch fox shock and a adjustable link called sybil, it can be adjust from 2.3 to 4.2 inches of rear travel. The ground clearance was 12.5 inch and the wheel base a inch shorter than a fuel ex 8 . S work enduro 29 is nothing new...just a recap, because a lot of people is investing money on 29 ( on any place 5 years ago 29 er were hybrid biked with 700 rims with 34c tires) at the end all of them will end up with a front basket ready for groceries...the sram xx1, just the same as the Hammersmith am I have in sale for 2 month and no one care, what a way to waste 575.00 usd. Sorry for 29 er lovers , nice paint, beautifull gloss the best shock but useless bike size.

In case you didn't notice, this is the s-works enduro. S-works means top of the line everything, and top of the line price to go with it. This technology will evenually trickle down to a lower price point. Also, if you missed the entire first paragraph, specialized was able to play around with the geometry of the bike to give it similar dimensions to its 26" couterpart by using a fancy linkage and shaping the tubes to allow for 155mm of travel at the same time.

For the price it would want to be a brilliant ride, irrespective of wheel size.
I ride a mojo HD my mates ride a pivot firebird and an enduro s works and we all get to the bottom of the hill at the same time.

Is anyone else worried about massive frame flex that a 29er plus long travel create? there is a reason many companies stay at 120mm.

Time to go with dual crown 29er forks i guess... but then. . . what do you do with big travel. Personally I go down hills FAST, and find the biggest jumps I can find. you dont want to hit technical sections fast with a 29er. Fork flex? maybe not so much with 34mm stanchions, but wider tires also means more rotational mass, thus creating greater under steer. (just remembered the tubeless carbon rims) maybe not.(thought I was on to something...)

I was so against 29 at first. After riding a few short travel 29 bikes I was sold on them for XC of course. Then I rode a Stumpy Evo 29. Keep in mind I only rode longer travel 26 bikes and mainly DH bikes. Man, I was so impressed with the Stumpy Evo 29. I think one of the keys is running a lot less sag than a 26 (like 15% or less). The first day out on this bike, I hit a 30 foot double (it's actually a triple), and cased it two times in a row before I cleared it. It literally handled the big hits better than any 6" 26 bike that I have ridden. These bikes absolutely rip the turns, the traction that they have is amazing. There is no comparison in high speed turns. This was with a revelation 29 fork too. I never noticed any flex either. The only way to enjoy a long travel 29 is to really push your limits and ride really aggressive. If you are a rider that fits these requirements, and faster is funner for you, long travel 29 for a trail bike is where it's at. I had to make a decision on a new trail bike recently, and I'm now a happy owner of a 2013 Stumpy Evo 29 carbon.

26 inch wheels do get caught up on big bumps and square rocks in a way 29 inch wheels dont. It's a fact. On relatively flat rocky sections of trail i can see 29 inch wheels being an advantage. Why is it so hard for you to accept that 26 inch wheels have limitations and drawbacks also? Have you ever ridden a 29er? Bare in mind i dont own one.

Actually all our dh-bikes run Avid 1 to 5. Flawless performance for 3 years on steep alpine dh-trails. Hope and Formula are just painful with their artificially hard brake point and they fail allthetime.

Avid make inconsisten brakes. I have 3 year old Elixir 5s on my trail bike and they are great. Exactly how i like a bike and just as good as my shimano brakes. I had juicys and they were abysmal and a few of my friends have different elixirs and they have had a mixture of problems and no problems at all. I dont understand it to be honest.

The development of this bike is why Specialized execs were all POO POO'ing 650Bs at Interbike last fall. They've spent their cookie jar money on this thing already and missed the boat on the explosion of 650B interest, so they of course had to complain about them. Also they should have named that frame feature something other than X-Wing... unless of course their goal was to be sued by Disney.

I bet Specialized has a little more cookie jar money laying around, and to say they missed the boat on the 650B "explosion" is like a triple jump to a conclusion. Nothing like wild speculation. Why go 650B if you can go 29" and maintain 155mm travel and 26" geometry? Agility? Based on this artilce and others, the bike is plenty agile. Speed? Again, take a look this and other articles. Plus, if speed was an issue, why would CC racers love 29rs? To follow the 650B explosion? Maybe they could have done that, but isn't that exactly the type of thing that most PBrs hate?

Except its not 26" geometry... the head angle is close, but the fork offset is a lot greater, the wheelbase increase is enormous, and the standover height increase puts the bike outside the use of anyone shorter than 5'5". Cross Country riders love 29ers for the speed yes, it rolls over stuff you see on XC courses better (roots, rocks). You don't have to steer around stuff wasting time/energy avoiding things when the wheels will go over it without robbing much momentum. But 650Bs roll over stuff also. Not as well as 29ers but better than 26ers, and they fit riders who fall below 5'5", and they do it with virtually identical geometry to 26ers. Most PBers hate change... they hate improving technology, new standards, and anything that suddenlly makes their own bikes outdated and obsolete.

My point is this - a decision to produce a 29r Enduro doesn't mean they missed the 650B boat. If I were a bike manufacturer and I wanted to produce a differentiated product in a world of very similar bikes, I would look to break conventions where I could. One of the reasons 650B is around is because of industry conventions about mixing 29" wheels with longer travel bikes. It would be easier to engineer a 650B 160mm Enduro, but as you said, 650B doesn't roll like a 29r. It looks to me that Specialized took the harder road and developed an Enduro that breaks an industry mold. Have you ridden one? I haven't, and we can talk about angles, wheelbase, chainstay length, etc. all day, but until you ride it, seems like saying 650B would have been better is premature. If you have ridden one, I'd be interested to know if you feel differently than the very positive reviews circulating the Internet.

Deeeeeeeeeeeeeight: Personally, I am against all these standards that come every year! The manufacturers are finding ways to make us renew more gear in the pretext of a "pseudo" innovation and the opportunity to raise prices. Mountain biking has become a real machine marketiing to make money while contributing to the consumer society .Finally, I do not see the interest of all these standards, if we want to be effective, it must focus on training and not the latest gear!

@Saidrick... except I'm not, which is why I'm selling off my 26ers and changing my fleet over to 650Bs and 29ers. The only 26er I've added to my collection in the past six years for my own actual usage has been my fat bike, and its only a 26er in wheel size. The actual diameter of the inflated 3.8" wide tires is nearly 29".

High end will always offer all the choices. Always have, always will.
Things generally do not go away in mountain biking.
Look at full suspension. 20 years later and we still have hardtails. Some are even fully rigid.

@Saidrick... Would you consider Trek and Specialized companies that make High-End bikes ? I would. Tell me then why the High End Specialized Cross Country model, the Epic only come with 29" wheels. Why does the Stumpjumper hardtails not come with anything but 29" wheels ? Same is happening over at Trek. They dropped the last carbon fiber 26er hardtail model from the lineup this year. For high end hardtails its 29er and only 29ers. For full suspension, you can still get the Fuel's with 26" wheels but that's likely to change in the next few years.

You know, nobody's mentioned this year, but last fall Aaron Gwinn was testing the new Trek 650B DH bike and apparently enjoying it, then the team jump to Specialized happened and conveniently they already had this Enduro 29er in development. Anyone want to place bets on us seeing Aaron riding megavalanche on this thing ?

As much as we all hate to agree with @ProTour he is right in this case. 650 will never be a worthy competitor to 29, but it will challenge and most likely replace 26 in the future, whether we want it to or not.

Even though this is a very cool bike and 29er design, I believe 29er's are still the best option for a trail/xc bike. When it comes to enduro riding i think the 26 inch wheel design works better for that riding style.

I don't believe in 'better' or 'worse'. what it really comes down to is rider preference and local trail conditions. For tight, twisty trails with a lot of switchbacks and g-outs, go 26". for long, straight up-and-down trails, apparently 29er is the better bike.

I think I would still rather keep my 26". I know three people who ride 29er's and all the rest of my mountain biking friends (probably about 7-10 of them locally) all prefer 26.

I do like the ability to quickly power out of things with my 26". I rode a few 29ers and they were fast going on smooth to rough straight single track but slow when things turned a ton. A 29er HT is a good choice for XC but that is where the benefits of the wagon wheel stop for my heavy butt.

67,5 head angle on a 155 travel bike. It's a trail bike with more travel. I don't like it, I'm sure the S-Works is riding like a dream but the Comp or whatever version (the cheapest one) will be sluggish, wallowy, unresponsive and lame.

No, I'll die with my 26inch wheels thank you very much, the smaller wheels are so much funner. And if you think that someone on a budget bike will go as fast as a full carbon super bike you're drunk, larger wheels role better and carry speed better over bumps. fact.

No, the stuff does not go faster, it is only the driver that sets the limits.For my part compet and against the clock, I already beat guys 29 "and carbon, while I ride 26" steel frame (steel frame English )